Social Science & Medicine 56 (2003) 1505–1515

Charitable food assistance as symbolic gesture:

an ethnographic study of food banks in Ontario
Valerie Tarasuka,*, Joan M. Eakinb
a
Department of Nutritional Sciences, University of Toronto, Faculty of Medicine, 150 College Street, Toronto, Ont., Canada, M5S 3E2
b
Department of Public Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont., Canada

Abstract

Community-based charitable food assistance programs have recently been established in several affluent nations to
distribute public and corporate food donations to ‘the needy’. In Canada, food banks comprise the primary response to
hunger and food insecurity, but problems of unmet food need persist. We conducted an ethnographic study of food
bank work in southern Ontario to examine the functioning of these extra-governmental, charitable food assistance
programs in relation to problems of unmet need. Our results suggest that the limited, variable and largely
uncontrollable supply of food donations shaped the ways in which food assistance was defined and the practices that
governed its distribution. Workers framed the food assistance as a supplement or form of acute hunger relief, but
generally acknowledged that the food given was insufficient to fully meet the needs of those who sought assistance. In
response to supply limitations, workers restricted both the frequency with which individual clients could receive
assistance and the amount and selection of food that they received on any one occasion. Food giving was essentially a
symbolic gesture, with the distribution of food assistance dissociated from clients’ needs and unmet needs rendered
invisible. We conclude that, structurally, food banks lack the capacity to respond to the food needs of those who seek
assistance. Moreover, the invisibility of unmet need in food banks provides little impetus for either community groups
or government to seek solutions to this problem.
r 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Food assistance; Food banks; Food security; Ethnography; Canada

Introduction 1997). Variously termed ‘food poverty’ or ‘food

In the 1980s and 1990s, food scarcity and food
deprivation became recognized problems among the
poor in many affluent western nations (Alaimo, Briefel,
Frongillo, & Olson, 1998; Andrews, Nord, Bickel, &
Carlson, 2000; Craig & Dowler, 1997; Davis & Tarasuk,
1994; Lang, 1997; Lang, 1999; Leather, 1996; Le Bihan,
Michaud, & Rotily, 1997; McIntyre, Connor, & Warren,
2000; New Zealand Network Against Food Poverty,
1999; Nord, Jemison, & Bickel, 1999; Poppendieck,
1995; Poppendieck, 1997; Riches, 1997a, b; Russell et al.,
1999; Tarasuk & Davis, 1996; Uttley, 1997; Wilson,
*Corresponding author. Tel.: 1-416-978-0618; fax: 1-416-978-
5882.
E-mail address: valerie.tarasuk@utoronto.ca (V. Tarasuk).
insecurity’, this issue has sometimes been described as
a paradox of ‘want amidst plenty’ (Hawkes & Webster,
2000), given the abundance of food in these countries
and the fact that a considerable amount of food is
wasted through current production, retail, and consu-
mer practices (e.g. an estimated 27% of food in the US
goes to waste (Hawkes & Webster, 2000). The jobless-
ness, low wages, and inadequate welfare benefits that
underpin problems of food insecurity among the poor
have been linked to changing social and economic
conditions and fundamental shifts in social policies
(including particularly, welfare reforms) that have
accompanied the neoliberal economics of this period
(Riches, 1997c).
In the context of reductions in publicly funded
programs for the poor and unemployed, one response

0277-9536/02/$ - see front matter r 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 2 7 7 - 9 5 3 6 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 1 5 2 - 1
1506 V. Tarasuk, J.M. Eakin / Social Science & Medicine 56 (2003) 1505–1515
to the food problems of low-income groups in many
countries has been the establishment of community-
based, charitable food assistance programs. The solicita-
tion of charitable food donations from the public is
often combined with the collection and redistribution of
‘surplus’ food—food that cannot be sold through
regular market channels. Although the initiatives vary
in terms of government involvement, funding, regula-
tory controls, voluntary sector participation, and
reliance on agricultural surplus versus donations from
food retailers, surplus food redistribution schemes have
been described in the United States, Canada, Australia,
New Zealand, the United Kingdom, France, Germany,
Spain, Italy, Belgium, Poland, Portugal, Greece, Ireland,
Czechoslovakia, and Romania (Gerbouin-R!erolle &
Chabeau, 1997; Hawkes & Webster, 2000; Le Bihan,
Michaud, & Rotily, 1997; New Zealand Network
Against Food Poverty, 1999; Poppendieck, 1995,1998a;
Riches, 1986, 1997b). In the United Kingdom, the
expansion of surplus-food redistribution is currently a
topic of heated debate (Hawkes & Webster, 2000).
The mobilization of community resources to collect
and redistribute ‘surplus’ food to feed the hungry is a
compelling strategy from several perspectives. In the
context of hunger and food insecurity, redistributing
rather than wasting food can be seen as a moral
imperative (Hawkes & Webster, 2000; Riches, 1986).
The diversion of food from landfill sites is also appealing
from an environmental perspective. Surplus food redis-
tribution programs provide an economical and ‘envir-
onmentally friendly’ means for food corporations to
dispose of unsaleable products, while also being an
expression of good corporate citizenship (Cooper, 1997;
DeLind, 1994; Poppendieck, 1998a; Riches, 1997b). In
some countries (notably the European Union and the
United States), these schemes provide a mechanism
through which governments can manage agricultural
surplus (Hawkes & Webster, 2000; Poppendieck, 1998a).
Insofar as the programs are operated by the voluntary
sector, they appear to be almost cost-free. Further, this
response to problems of hunger and food insecurity is
consistent with the current emphasis on private sector
and market-based solutions to social problems in the
context of welfare reforms.
In Canada, food assistance is distributed by ‘food
banks’, extra-governmental community organizations
that collect donated foodstuffs and redistribute them to
the ‘needy’, working largely with volunteer labour and
donated equipment and facilities. Some of the food
comes from the public (typically garnered through ‘food
drives’), but in many regions, the bulk of the food
distributed is donated by food producers, processors,
and retailers. Much of this food is donated because it
cannot be retailed due to manufacturing errors or
damage during shipping, handling, and storage, or
because the products are perishable and no longer of
retail quality or nearing their expiry dates (Teron &
Tarasuk, 1999). Some food banks augment food
donations with food purchases, but the absence of core
funding or large cash donations generally limits this
practice.
Food banks began to be established in Canada during
the recession of the early 1980s and were initially
construed as temporary relief operations (Riches, 1986).
However, the programs rapidly proliferated and de-
mands for food assistance steadily grew (Canadian
Association of Food Banks, 1998; Wilson & Steinman,
2000). Although no recent annual estimates are avail-
able, 8.6% of the population were estimated to use food
banks in 1994 (Riches, 1997b). Nonetheless, many
people still report serious food shortages, hunger, and
food deprivation (Antoniades & Tarasuk, 1998; Badun,
Evers, & Hooper, 1995; Che & Chen, 2001; Dachner &
Tarasuk, forthcoming; Hamelin, Beaudry, & Habicht,
2002; Jacobs Starkey, Kuhnlein, & Gray-Donald, 1998;
McIntyre, Connor & Warren, 2000; Tarasuk & Beaton,
1999a). Food bank client surveys suggest that many
receive insufficient assistance to meet their needs
(Hobbs, MacEachern, McIvor, & Turner, 1993; Jacobs
Starkey, Kuhnlein, & Gray-Donald, 1998; Jacobs
Starkey & Kuhnlein, 2000; Jacobs Starkey, Gray-
Donald, & Kuhnlein, 1999; Tarasuk & Beaton,
1999a, b). In addition, examinations of the assistance
provided by food banks confirm the limited quantity
and nutritional quality of food available for distribution
(Jacobs Starkey, 1994; Kennedy, Sheeshka & Smedmor,
1992; Teron & Tarasuk, 1999).
Although there is research documenting unmet need
and several authors have questioned the appropriateness
and effectiveness of food banks as a means to address
food problems in Canada that are rooted in severe and
chronic poverty (Jacobs Starkey, Kuhnlein, & Gray-
Donald, 1998; Riches, 1989; Riches, 1997b; Tarasuk &
Beaton, 1999a; Tarasuk & Maclean, 1990), there has
been little study of the way food banks operate and how
they deal with client need. In search of insight into the
functioning of food banks in relation to continued
problems of hunger and food insecurity, we conducted
an ethnographic study of food bank work in southern
Ontario. We were particularly interested in learning how
issues of client need were constructed and managed in
the context of everyday operations. We chose to use
ethnographic methods because they are especially
appropriate for understanding phenomena in context
and have been used successfully to elucidate the
operations and functions of other community-based
food programs (Dayle, McIntyre, & Raine-Travers,
2000; Glasser, 1988). This paper reports on one
important set of findings from our research: how food
banks’ reliance on donations promotes a system of
food distribution that is disassociated from clients’ food
needs.
 V. Tarasuk, J.M. Eakin / Social Science & Medicine 56 (2003) 1505–1515
Methods
The study consisted of the collection and analysis of
observational and interview data on the day-to-day
operation of 15 food banks in Toronto (a highly
multicultural city of 3 million) and in several smaller
communities nearby. The study protocol was approved
by the Human Subjects Review Committee at the
University of Toronto. Data gathering was carried out
over 18 months, from January, 1999 to July, 2000.
Initially, random selection was used to identify eight
food banks from among the 49 organizations distribut-
ing food from a central food collection and coordinating
agency in the city. Random selection was used to ensure
basic diversity in food bank features because at this
stage we had limited knowledge of how they differed
from each other or the significance of such difference for
the way they operated. This initial sample included food
banks that varied in terms of such characteristics as
organizational sponsorship, array of services offered,
location, sources of food, and type of staff.
Subsequent food banks were selected through a
‘theoretical sampling’ strategy whereby food banks were
chosen in order to explore specific issues or emerging
hypotheses that arose in the analysis (which, as is
common to much qualitative research, occurred simul-
taneously with data collection) and to enable strategic
comparative analysis, a core ethnographic technique
(Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Hammersley & Atkinson,
1983). For example, through our analysis of the factors
shaping distribution practices, we identified the need to
sample food banks that did not operate under the
umbrella of the city’s central coordinating agency.
Similarly, we sought out food banks that had some
paid staff and ones that were client-run, in order to
explore the significance of these features on distribution
practices and workers’ perceptions of food bank work.
Food banks were added to the sample until we were
satisfied that we had captured the range of operating
styles among food banks in this region, and that
methodological ‘saturation’ had been reached - the
point at which no new dimensions or disconfirming
evidence of our concepts and analysis were being
identified (Strauss & Corbin, 1991).
Data consisted of on-site observations of food bank
operations, and personal individual interviews with
workers. Permission to observe and to interview staff
was sought in advance from the director or coordinator
of each food bank selected, after the research objectives
and protocol had been fully disclosed. A research
assistant visited each of the food banks on two occasions
for a period of several hours during their hours of
operation. Care was taken to ensure that observations
encompassed all major activities (e.g., set-up, receipt of
food deliveries, food distribution, clean-up). Sometimes
the researcher sat unobtrusively in waiting areas
1507
observing what went on; in other instances she
participated in the staff’s activities, doing whatever
seemed helpful or appropriate (e.g. assisting with the re-
packaging of bulk dry foodstuffs). Her identity as a
researcher was made known. Detailed observations were
recorded on audio-tape after each visit.
At each site between two and three ‘front line’
workers were approached for individual, semi-struc-
tured, taped interviews, which were typically held in a
quiet part of the food bank. Most workers were
approached by the researcher during an observation
visit, and were selected to tap different types of workers
and perspectives both within the particular food bank
and across the sample. Participation was voluntary,
confidential, and secured by informed consent. In one
food bank, workers declined to be interviewed; it was
unclear to us whether this was due to an inappropriate
approach on our part or to ongoing tensions between
the food bank and the umbrella organization related to
food distribution practices. In total, 29 workers were
interviewed.
Observations and interviews were directed by the on-
going positioning of the analysis, as is the practice in
most forms of qualitative research. Generally, however,
field observations focussed on the material environment,
appearance and behaviour of clients and workers, and
interaction (Lofland & Lofland, 1995). In the interviews,
which typically lasted from 1 to 2 h, workers were asked
to talk about how they had come to such work, what
they did, and how they understood the nature of the
work, the agencies they worked for, the clients they
served and their needs, and the role and function of food
banks. The role of the researcher in qualitative data
collection is a singularly important one that functions as
a key resource in the research process (Patton, 1999). In
our case, we believe that the project benefited substan-
tially from the research assistant’s personal familiarity
and experience with the people and subject of the
research, in terms both of the trust she was able to
develop with participants and the acuity of her
observations and interpretations.
Verbatim transcripts of the field observations and
interviews were managed and analyzed with the
assistance of a computer software program for qualita-
tive data (The Ethnograph, Qualis Research Associates,
1995). The theoretical approach to analysis was ‘struc-
tural-interactionist’ (Eakin & MacEachen, 1998) in that
it tried to link workers’ subjectivity and practices to
broader social and organizational conditions and con-
textual circumstance (Ezzy, 1997; Silverman, 1985).
Analytic techniques included the use of selected proce-
dures of grounded theory analysis (Glaser & Strauss,
1967), particularly the techniques of constant compar-
ison and concept construction. Interpretive strategies
drew on symbolic interactionist and narrative perspec-
tives (Denzin & Lincoln, 1994). Our primary analytic
1508 V. Tarasuk, J.M. Eakin / Social Science & Medicine 56 (2003) 1505–1515
technique was in-depth, repeated, independent reading
of observations and verbatim interview texts, accom-
panied by exhaustive discussion to ensure that the
interpretations were robust and fully grounded empiri-
cally. Data segments were coded according to a
conceptual schema that was developed during this
process. Re-analysis by conceptual category across and
within food banks (with the assistance of search and
combine capacities of the software) allowed refinement
and solidification of the emerging analysis. Our analyses
were assisted by the development of summaries of
individual workers and food banks, and by constant
‘memoing’ of themes, concepts, and emerging theoriza-
tions. The active participation of the research assistant
in discussions of the data further ensured that our
interpretations remained grounded in the data.
Findings
Overview of how food banks operate
The food banks in this study operated under the
general direction of church groups or non-governmen-
tal, community service agencies. Although some were in
facilities that had been constructed or renovated
specifically for their purpose, many food banks were
housed in makeshift accommodations at the sites of
their ‘parent’ organizations. Most distributed food 2–3
times per week, typically operating for 2–4 h at a time.
Although paid staff persons functioned as coordinators
in some food banks, the vast majority of the day-to-day
work of running the food banks was done by volunteers.
These were typically unemployed people, and in some
agencies they included former and current food bank
clients. In some food banks, people were also working
there to fulfill student placements, community service
sentences, or work-for-welfare requirements.
Most of the food banks received food from a central
collection centre that gathered food from industry and
public donations, although a few food banks solicited
donations directly. Some agencies augmented the supply
of industry and public donations with food purchases,
collections of unsaleable perishable foods from local
retailers, and local church donations. When food
donations were delivered, workers sorted and shelved
or refrigerated the food for later use. When fresh
produce or damaged or outdated products were
received, food fit for distribution was separated from
items considered to be inedible (e.g., rotten vegetables)
or requiring additional work (e.g., repackaging, clean-
ing, culling) before distribution.
When people came for food assistance, they were
initially interviewed by food bank staff to determine
their eligibility. Prospective clients were typically re-
quired to present identification documents and proof of
their place of residence, income and basic expenditures.
Because the distribution of food assistance in this area
was organized into geographic units, clients were
screened to ensure that they lived in the correct
catchment area. In what amounted to a means test,
income and expenditure information was compared with
some income-based criterion of ‘need’ to determine
eligibility for food assistance. Criteria varied across
agencies; some were developed ‘in-house’, but two
agencies used standard government definitions of ‘low
income’, such as the Statistics Canada Low-Income Cut-
offs (National Council of Welfare, 1999).
Those who qualified for food were then given
assistance, typically in the form of one or more bags
of groceries. Ideally, the food was intended to last clients
for some preset number of days (typically two or three).
In some food banks the bags were prepacked by
workers; in others, clients were permitted some choice
over what they received. In addition, some food banks
had a ‘free table’ of damaged goods, outdated products,
highly perishable produce, or products of low utility.
Clients were permitted to take as much of this food as
they wanted. Some food banks also offered other kinds
of assistance to clients, such as information about local
programs, job training opportunities, etc; referrals to
other programs and services; assistance in finding
affordable housing; and free, used clothing.
In the sections that follow, we examine the ways in
which food banks’ reliance on food donations defined
their work and led to food distribution practices that
effectively dissociated the act of giving food assistance
from client need. Here ‘need’ refers simply to the
requirement for food that is implicit in the client’s
request for food assistance.
The problem of supply
In all of the food banks studied, the available supply
of food for distribution was limited and highly variable,
being contingent upon charitable donations. The pro-
blem of supply had fundamental implications for the
food that could be given to clients. As one worker
explained, ‘‘We have to give them just what we have’’
(1302)1. As food donations fluctuated, so did the
amount and selection of foods distributed: ‘‘At certain
times of the year, in between food drives and so on, we
give them less’’ (0901). Workers felt powerless to do
anything other than decrease food assistance as supplies
became depleted. ‘‘When the shelves are bare, the
shelves are bare’’ (1102).
The selection and quality of foods available for
distribution was also a function of the kinds of
donations received. Despite the efforts workers in some
1
Denotes the food bank and interviewee from which the
quote was extracted.
 V. Tarasuk, J.M. Eakin / Social Science & Medicine 56 (2003) 1505–1515
food banks put into cleaning up and repackaging
damaged goods and culling edible produce from
donations of perishable fruits and vegetables, the quality
of the food they distributed was largely outside their
control. ‘‘We can’t help what you get’’, a worker
explained (1501). The only decision latitude workers
had was in deciding whether or not a particular food
item was fit for consumption. Given the limited supply,
however, they appeared more likely to try to salvage
food than discard it.
The problem of supply—the limited, variable, and
largely uncontrollable supply of food—had important
implications for how the work of food banks was
defined and legitimated, and for how assistance was
provided.
The meaning of the food assistance and client need
Workers appeared to understand the meaning of the
food assistance they provided in one of two ways: (i) as a
supplement to clients’ existing resources; (ii) as immedi-
ate relief from the physical sensation of hunger. As
discussed in this section, each perspective on the
meaning of food assistance was related to the problem
of supply, and each served to legitimate the work of food
banks given the constraints imposed by the problem of
supply. Further, each perspective represented a parti-
cular conception of client need.
Food assistance as a supplement
Some workers understood clients’ needs for food as
vast and perpetual, rooted in their chronically low
incomes. Given the problem of supply, the idea that
food banks could satisfy the food needs of all those who
sought assistance was untenable for these workers.
There’s no way we could supply any family with what
they totally need. We’re only a supplement, and
that’s the best we can do as a food bank. If we start
supplying a family with a total need ... we’d run out
[of food] so fast it wouldn’t be funny. (0401)
Constructing food assistance as a supplement dimin-
ished the importance of the quantity of food provided to
clients. The objective of providing food assistance
became ‘‘helping clients to get through the month’’,
but not actually trying to ensure that their food needs
were fully met.
The framing of food assistance as a supplement also
served to lessen the importance of the particular
selection of foods distributed since there was no illusion
that the assistance was intended to completely meet
clients’ food needs. One worker explained that even if
they only had sweets to give out, these could be used as
treats for the children and parents could use their own
1509
money to buy the other kinds of food they required.
Similarly, the food bank might not be able to offer
appropriate foods for a diabetic client, but the client
could use the foods given when he or she had visitors.
Isn’t it help for them not to spend their own money
for something like this? They can go and buy exactly
the stuff they need from the store. (0701)
The construction of charitable food assistance as a
supplement to household food purchases was particu-
larly significant given the role of food banks in
distributing industry donations. In the course of
accepting donations of food products that would
otherwise be dumped in landfill sites, food banks
received some products with little or no nutritional
value (e.g., food colouring, condiments), as well as
products that were in very poor condition, outdated, or
unfamiliar to clients. Whereas the distribution of some
of these foods might have been considered inappropriate
if the goal was to meet clients’ food or nutrition needs,
defining food assistance as a supplement justified the
distribution of any and all kinds of products and
rendered less relevant questions about the amount of
food given.
Food assistance as immediate relief from hunger
In contrast to the construction of food assistance as a
supplement, some of the workers we interviewed framed
it terms of hunger relief. Clients’ need for assistance was
understood as urgent and extreme desperation for food.
As one worker explained, ‘‘There are people that will
starve without the food banks’’ (1001). Giving some
food—any food—to people in these circumstances was
worthwhile because ‘‘at least we know they will have
something, and it’s better than nothing’’ (0102).
Although the perspective might seem in opposition to
the notion of food assistance as a supplement, both
framings of the work appeared to coexist. One worker
differentiated between different types of clients—those
who would starve without the assistance they received
from food banks, and those who were simply supple-
menting their low incomes with the free food.
The framing of food assistance as hunger relief also
appeared intimately intertwined with the problem of
supply. It served to justify the distribution of any and all
kinds of food products, in any amounts, because any
food given could serve to abate immediate sensations of
hunger. Thus clients’ willingness to accept even stale
baked goods and damaged canned and packaged foods
were cited as evidence of their need for food. Interest-
ingly, like those who framed food assistance as a
supplement, workers who spoke of food assistance as
hunger relief did not appear to see themselves as
responsible for meeting such desperate food needs in
1510 V. Tarasuk, J.M. Eakin / Social Science & Medicine 56 (2003) 1505–1515
any consistent or ongoing way. They just did what they
could.
In addition to shaping the ways in which the work of
food banks was defined and legitimated, the problem of
supply had profound implications for the way in which
food was distributed to those who sought assistance. It
underpinned the practices of restricting individuals’
access to assistance, and controlling the selection and
limiting the amount of foods they received. The problem
of supply also set the stage for food rationing, as
workers endeavoured to maintain operations despite
extremely limited supplies.
The restriction of access to assistance
In response to the limited supply of donated food,
food banks limited individual clients’ access to
food assistance. All of the food banks visited had
policies and procedures in place to limit the frequency
with which individual clients could obtain assistance.
Typically, clients were permitted to receive assistance
once per month, although a few food banks allowed
more frequent access (e.g., once per week) for
clients identified through means testing as living in
particularly desperate circumstances. Once deemed
eligible for food assistance, clients were expected to
learn and comply with the food bank’s rules regarding
frequency. Some food banks provided clients with
appointment cards, reminding them of the next date
when they would again be able to obtain food assistance.
Workers diligently maintained computerized or paper
files to track the frequency with which individual clients
obtained assistance, and rules on the permitted fre-
quency of assistance appeared to be strictly enforced in
most food banks. It was not unusual for clients who
sought help earlier than their prescribed date to be told
to come back later.
Restrictions on clients’ access to assistance were
intimately linked to the problem of supply. One
worker in an agency that endeavoured to provide clients
with a three-day supply of food, once per month,
explained that this was ‘‘the maximum the agency
can do’’ (1102). If they permitted greater access, they
would be forced to limit the number of days they
were opened, and thus limit the number of people
they served. Rather than providing greater access to
assistance for a smaller number, the food bank opted
to serve more people but give them less food. It is
unclear what constituted the optimal balance between
the number of clients served and amount of assistance
provided to each client. However, the interplay
between food banks’ hours of operation and policies
regarding the frequency with which clients would
be served importantly shaped the assistance they
provided.
The management of choice
In addition to having implications for the frequency
with which individual clients could receive assistance,
the problem of supply also underpinned the practice of
managing client choice. The amount and selection of
food that clients received was carefully controlled, with
food distribution structured to provide clients with a
standard amount and mix of foods, to the extent that
supplies permitted. This typically included giving each
client foods from the different food groups in Canada’s
Food Guide to Healthy Eating (Health Canada, 1997),
presumably in a effort to provide them with a ‘balanced’
diet. Some workers also tried to ensure that each client
received a selection of foods that could be combined into
meals (e.g., dried pasta given with a can of sauce).
However, the net effect of these practices was to limit
any one client’s access to particular classes of food,
ensuring that each client got a mix of foods of varied
nutritional value and market value, and probably of
varied desirability.
Within this general practice, two distinct approaches
to food distribution were observed, reflecting different
views on the importance of permitting clients choice
over the foods received. In some food banks, workers
prepared bags of food for distribution with little or no
input from clients. The premise underlying this practice
was captured in a sign posted in one such agency. It
read:
Most of the food that we dispense here comes from
[central distribution agency]. We accept all kinds of
food in any brands and we expect you to as well. No
substitutions are allowed.
Workers often explained that the food bank was not a
grocery store, so people could not expect to select the
foods they received. Some workers maintained that if
people were really hungry, they would take whatever
they were offered.
By contrast, other agencies had systems in place to
permit clients’ some choice about the selection of foods
they received, within specific parameters. Workers in
these agencies maintained that the practice of giving
clients’ choice represented an important show of respect
for them.
I won’t say, ‘you’re begging for something [so] you
must take whatever you get’. I don’t look at it that
way. I believe that whatever you like - [if] we have it,
you get it. (0602)
Workers in one agency provided clients with shopping
carts and permitted them to move through the store-
room, filling their carts with foods of their choosing,
constrained only by the agency’s predetermined limits
for particular classes of foods. More commonly,
 V. Tarasuk, J.M. Eakin / Social Science & Medicine 56 (2003) 1505–1515
however, clients identified their selections by ticking
options on a questionnaire or verbally indicated their
choices from among a selection of foods shown to them,
but workers assembled the hampers. The practice of
permitting clients’ some choice clearly enabled the
assistance to be better tailored to their individual
preferences and needs, but the amount and selection of
food clients received was still limited and tightly
managed.
In summary, although systems of food distribution
varied across food banks, the management of the
amount and selection of food given to any one client
was integral to all of the distribution systems we
observed. The practice arose in response to the limited,
highly variable, and largely uncontrollable supply of
food available for distribution.
Rationing
The impact of the problem of supply on food
distribution practices was most evident when supplies
became severely limited. Regardless of whether or not
clients were permitted choice over the foods they
received, when food supplies became depleted, food
distribution in all of the food banks observed became a
process of rationing whatever food was on hand to
ensure that it ‘lasted’ for the hours of operation. In one
food bank that was open three times/week and received
weekly food deliveries from a central food distribution
agency, workers systematically divided the week’s
supply into thirds to ensure that they had always had
something to give out during business hours and that the
selection of foods available for distribution would be
more or less consistent across the week. Despite efforts
like these, however, the selection of foods often
deteriorated during the intervals between deliveries of
food donations. Even between opening and closing time,
supplies of some foods could run out. Thus clients at
some food banks lined up outside the doors to ensure
that they would be served first when the food bank
opened.
While it might be surmised that, despite the efforts to
ration remaining stock, food banks would eventually
run out of food if food shortages persisted for any length
of time, only one instance of a food bank closing
because of lack of food was reported to us. Workers
appeared to take pride in the fact that they had
successfully managed periods of low supply through
careful planning and rationing. Even when food supplies
were severely restricted, distribution practices in most
food banks appeared to be guided by the principle that
anyone who had been deemed eligible to receive
assistance be given something. One worker explained,
‘‘we just can’t turn them away’’ (0102).
Workers readily acknowledged that the food they
were giving out was far from adequate to meet clients’
1511
needs, but, in the context of supply constraints, they
perceived themselves as powerless to do anything other
than ‘give less’.
I know there for a while we were running really
low.... People were coming in complaining, you
know, that this isn’t going to last us, and we just
couldn’t help them any more than we were. (1501)
One worker described having so little food left that all
they could give people was cereal or snack foods, but
explained
We know they can’t live off of snacks, but ... we’re
going to give it to them still. At least we know that
they [will] have something and it’s better than
nothing. (0102).
Even paltry levels of assistance were seen as critical to
some clients because the food could abate immediate
problems of hunger.
The dissociation of food assistance from client need
The foregoing examination of food distribution
practices reveals how, in the wake of the problem of
supply, the distribution of food assistance was largely
dissociated from client need, irrespective of how this
need was understood. The frequency with which clients
could receive assistance and the level of assistance they
received on any one occasion were driven not by their
needs for food so much as by food bank policies and
practices designed to maintain operations in the face of a
limited, highly variable, and largely uncontrollable
supply of food donations. Even in food banks where
the frequency of access to assistance was tailored to
some measure of client need and clients were permitted
some choice over what they received, the assistance
provided was tightly managed, and it was ultimately a
function of the existing supply of donated foodstuffs.
When supplies were constrained, assistance was reduced.
Food distribution appeared governed by the principle
that all those deemed eligible for assistance be given
something, no matter how little. In this context, the
giving of food was essentially a symbolic gesture, with
distribution practices designed to maintain operations
but dissociated from clients’ actual or perceived needs.
The dissociation of food assistance from client need
and the construction of food assistance as a symbolic
gesture had significant implications for clients. From the
workers’ perspective, it was not appropriate for clients
to look to food banks to meet their needs. In the same
way that workers were not responsible for the supply of
food they had available for distribution, they did not see
themselves as being responsible for meeting clients’
needs. Thus clients were expected to respect the food
bank’s efforts, recognize the constraints under which
1512 V. Tarasuk, J.M. Eakin / Social Science & Medicine 56 (2003) 1505–1515
they operated and, in keeping with the spirit of
charitable giving, accept any gesture of food assistance
with gratitude. Indeed, displays of gratitude were central
to the satisfaction some workers derived from their jobs.
Some workers cited clients’ gratitude as indication of
their need for food. As one worker explained, ‘‘When a
person comes to the food bank, I feel they need food
when they get their food and they’re very thankful for
what they get’’ (1301). Further, the legitimacy of clients’
needs could be drawn into question if they failed to
respond with gratitude for whatever assistance they were
offered.
There have been times when our shelves have been
totally empty, and we’re squeezing out as much as we
can. ... Those who are really in desperate need will
come in and they’ll say, ‘oh thank you’ ... and the
other people will come in and they say, ‘well is this all
we’re getting?’ Well those ones I worry about. (1502)
Clients were actively discouraged from asserting their
needs or appraising the gesture of food assistance. The
responses of gratitude that workers valued functioned to
further mask clients’ real needs, while giving the
impression that they had, in some way, been satisfied.
The dissociation of food distribution from clients’
food needs and the construction of food assistance as a
symbolic gesture also set the stage for people to be
labelled as ‘abusers of the system’ if they attempted to
obtain greater access to food assistance than permitted
by agency distribution policies. A client might do this by
providing a false name and address or by going to more
than one food bank so as to circumvent agency tracking
systems. Such incidents perhaps help to account for the
demand for identification and other documents to be
presented at the initial assessments of client eligibility in
all of the food banks observed, and some food banks’
practice of requesting proof of identity to be presented
at each subsequent visit. Discussions of ‘abuse’ were
common among workers in most of the food banks
visited.
One worker, herself with a history of poverty,
empathized with those who were caught ‘abusing’ the
system. ‘‘I know what it was like to, you know, be short
of food’’ (1502), she explained. This woman spoke about
the importance of flexibility in distribution policies,
recognizing that some people really do need help more
frequently than policies permit. ‘‘There are people that
have come in [more frequently than they were supposed
to] that you know that they’re in definite need, and we’ll
just give [food] to them’’ (1502). The link between
apparent abuse of the system and unmet need was
echoed by another worker who explained, ‘‘If somebody
abuses the food bank it’s because they need food ... and
if you stop and look at the food that food banks give
out, it’s ... nothing very grand’’ (1102).
More typically however, workers did not understand
clients’ so-called ‘abuse’ behaviour as arising from
their unmet food needs. Although workers recognized
that both the amount of food clients received and
the frequency with which they were permitted to obtain
assistance were a function of supply limitations, in
discussions of abuse, workers appeared to set their food
distribution practices beyond question. Evidence of
‘abuse’ was grounds for denying clients’ assistance
and possibly even banning them from receiving assis-
tance in the future. Like the discourse of gratitude, the
discourse of abuse functioned to suppress evidence of
unmet need among clients, effectively rendering their
need invisible.
In summary, we have argued that the limited, variable
and largely uncontrollable supply of food donations in
food banks shaped the way in which food assistance was
defined and the practices that governed its distribution.
Workers framed the food as a supplement, or in some
cases, as a form of acute hunger relief, but they were
under no illusions that the food they provided would
fully meet the needs of those who sought their
assistance. The distribution of food assistance in day-
to-day practice was, for the most part, dissociated from
client need. The frequency with which clients could
receive assistance and the amount and selection of food
they received on any one occasion were determined by
food bank policies and practices designed to maintain
operations in the face of supply limitations and
fluctuations. Within this context, the giving of food
was a symbolic gesture. Clients were expected to be
grateful for whatever food they received, and not to
appraise or reject the gesture or to assert their needs for
more food. Those who attempted to gain greater access
to food by circumventing distribution policies were
labelled ‘abusers’ and risked being banned from the food
bank indefinitely. The dissociation of food distribution
from need and the suppression of evidence of unmet
need among clients through the discourses of abuse and
gratitude effectively rendered clients’ food needs invi-
sible.
Discussion and conclusions
The dissociation of distribution practices from clients’
actual or stated food needs that has been described here
seems inevitable given the supply driven nature of food
banks. Distribution practices that limit both the
frequency with which individual clients can receive
assistance and the amount and selection of food that
they receive on any one occasion are rooted in the
necessity for workers to carefully manage the limited
supply. When supplies are severely constrained, our
research suggests that food giving is more a symbolic
gesture than a response to need.
 V. Tarasuk, J.M. Eakin / Social Science & Medicine 56 (2003) 1505–1515
Despite the political appeal of ‘food drives’ and
‘surplus’ food redistribution schemes as a means to
address problems of hunger and food insecurity, the
supply driven nature of these initiatives presents a
serious limitation. Structurally, food banks lack the
capacity to respond to the food needs of those who seek
assistance—a finding that may explain the reports of
unmet food needs among food bank users in Canada
(Hobbs et al. (1993); Jacobs Starkey, Kuhnlein, & Gray-
Donald, 1998; Jacobs Starkey, Gray-Donald, & Kuhn-
lein, 1999; Jacobs Starkey & Kuhnlein, 2000; Tarasuk &
Beaton, 1999a; Tarasuk & Beaton, 1999b). Further, our
findings provide no indication that the restructuring of
individual agencies or redesign of distribution practices
would ameliorate this problem. Increasing the supply of
donated foodstuffs available for distribution would
undoubtedly increase the amount of food assistance
given to individual households, but the potential for
marked increases in donations is limited. Already food
banks are reporting problems of ‘donor fatigue’ among
the public (Riches, 1997b), who are being asked to
support an increasing number of charitable causes as
more and more service activities are relegated to the
voluntary sector in Canada. The amount of usable
‘surplus’ food is also limited. As food producers and
retailers increase the efficiency of their operations as a
means to maintain their competitiveness in the market-
place, there is likely to be less food that cannot be
retailed.
Perhaps even more problematic than their inability to
meet clients’ food needs, however, is the way in which
food banks render the unmet need invisible. Others have
argued that insofar as food banks give the illusion of
effectively responding to hunger, they unwittingly
facilitate the further erosion of income supports to
those at the bottom, leading to increased poverty and
income inequality and a continued and growing need for
charitable food assistance (Poppendieck, 1998b; Riches,
1997b). As clients’ food needs are obfuscated through
the everyday practices of food banks, there is little
impetus for either community groups or government to
seek out other solutions.
The problem of supply, which we have argued is
fundamental to the dissociation of food assistance from
client need, is not unique to the food banks included in
this study. In a recent national survey of food banks,
most reported having to restrict the amount of
assistance offered and the frequency with which clients
could receive assistance because of insufficient supplies
(Wilson & Steinman, 2000). Further, the limited and
uncontrollable nature of a food supply based on
charitable donations and the struggle to balance this
supply with a large and growing demand for assistance
have been features of food banks in Canada since their
inception (Riches 1986; Tarasuk & Maclean, 1990).
Although charitable food assistance programs in the US
1513
(called ‘food pantries’ in that country) are more
centrally coordinated than those in Canada and include
more active government involvement, these programs
have also been described as donor-driven, rather than
needs-driven (Poppendieck, 1994). In her extensive study
of food pantries in the US, Poppendieck (1998a)
observed that supply limitations shaped distribution
practices. As in the food banks studied here, food
distribution in the US programs was characterized by
the management of choice and restrictions in food
access. Similarly; Curtis (1997), in a study of food
pantries in Delaware, documented reductions in the
amount of food assistance provided to households as
demand increased, and the periodic closure of some
pantries because they literally ran out of food. Interest-
ingly, in their study of four Paris food assistance
programs, Gerbouin-R!erolle and Chabeau (1997) also
concluded that clients’ reports of unmet need were
linked to the programs’ severe material constraints and
the growing demands for assistance. The similarities
between the results of our research and studies elsewhere
suggest that the dissociation of food assistance from
client need may be an inherent feature of assistance
programs reliant on corporate and public donations. As
such, our research contributes to current debates about
the expansion of surplus food redistribution schemes as
a public policy response to income-related food pro-
blems nationally and internationally (e.g., Hawkes &
Webster, 2000).
In conclusion, although ‘surplus’ food redistribution
schemes have burgeoned in Canada and elsewhere in
the wake of welfare reforms, the results of our research
raise questions about the wisdom of these responses
as a policy alternative. In this paper we have examined
food banks from the perspective of client need and
the problem of supply. In subsequent papers we will
report on other of our research findings, particularly
the ways in which food banks work is contingent upon
the availability and neediness of a large volunteer
workforce, marginalized from the paid labour market,
and the ways in which the structure of food banks
facilitates the disposal of unsaleable products for the
food industry. These findings will bring into further
question the appropriateness of surplus food redistribu-
tion as a response to food insecurity and highlight
the broad array of factors that contribute to its
entrenchment.
Acknowledgements
The authors are indebted to Randi Reynolds for her
very skilled research assistance and to Daily Bread Food
Bank for their help on this project. This research was
funded by a grant from the Social Sciences and
Humanities Research Council of Canada.
1514 V. Tarasuk, J.M. Eakin / Social Science & Medicine 56 (2003) 1505–1515
References
Alaimo, K., Briefel, R. R., Frongillo, E. A., & Olson, C. M.
(1998). Food insufficiency exists in the United States:
Results from the third national health and nutrition
examination survey (nhanes iii). American Journal of Public
Health, 88, 419–426.
Andrews, M., Nord, M., Bickel, G., & Carlson, S. (2000).
Household food security in the United States, 1999.
Washington DC: Economic Research Service, US Depart-
ment of Agriculture.
Antoniades, M., & Tarasuk, V. (1998). A survey of food
problems experienced by Toronto street youth. Canadian
Journal of Public Health, 89, 371–375.
Badun, C., Evers, S., & Hooper, M. (1995). Food security and
nutritional concerns of parents in an economically dis-
advantaged community. Journal of the Canadian Dietetic
Association, 56, 75–80.
Canadian Association of Food Banks. (1998). Hunger Count
1998. Emergency Food Assistance in Canada. Toronto,
ON: Canadian Association of Food Banks.
Che, J., & Chen, J. (2001). Food insecurity in Canadian
households. Health Reports, 12, 11–22.
Cooper, J. (1997). Partnerships for change. Canadian Grocer, 3,
13–17.
Craig, G., & Dowler, E. (1997). Let them eat cake! poverty,
hunger and the UK state. In G. Riches (Ed.), First world
hunger (pp. 108–133). London: MacMillan Press Ltd..
Curtis, K. A. (1997). Urban poverty and the social conse-
quences of privatized food assistance. Journal of Urban
Affairs, 19, 207–226.
Dachner, N., Tarasuk, V. (forthcoming). Homeless ‘‘squeegee
kids’’: food insecurity and daily survival. Social Science and
Medicine.
Davis, B., & Tarasuk, V. (1994). Hunger in Canada. Agriculture
and Human Values, 11, 50–57.
Dayle, J., McIntyre, L., & Raine-Travers, K. D. (2000). The
dragnet of children’s feeding programs in Atlantic Canada.
Social Science and Medicine, 51, 1783–1793.
DeLind, L. B. (1994). Celebrating hunger in Michigan: Critique
of an emergency food program and an alternative for the
future. Agriculture and Human Values, 11, 58–68.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Handbook of qualitative
research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Eakin, J. M., & MacEachen, E. (1998). Health and the social
relations of work: A study of the health-related experiences
of employees in small workplaces. Sociology of Health &
Illness, 20, 896–914.
Ezzy, D. (1997). Subjectivity and the labour process: Con-
ceptualising good work. Sociology, 31, 427–444.
Gerbouin-R!erolle, P., & Chabeau, L. (1997). Food programmes
and poor families in a suburb of Paris. In B. Kohler, . E.
Feichtinger, E. Barl.osius, & E. Dowler (Eds.), Poverty and
Food in Welfare Societies (pp. 325–335). Berlin: Edition
Sigma.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded
theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
Glasser, I. (1988). More than bread. Ethnography of a soup
kitchen. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.
Hamelin, A. M., Beaudry, M., & Habicht, J.-P. (2002).
Characterization of household food insecurity in Quebec:
Food and feelings. Social Science and Medicine, 54,
119–132.
Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (1983). Ethnography: Princi-
ples in practice. London: Tavistock.
Hawkes, C., & Webster, J. (2000). Too much and too little?
Debates on surplus food redistribution. London: Sustain.
Health Canada. (1997). Canada’s Food Guide to Healthy
Eating: Minister of Public Works and Government Services
Canada.
Hobbs, K., MacEachern, W., McIvor, A., & Turner, S. (1993).
Waste of a nation: Poor people speak out about charity.
Canadian Review of Social Policy, 31, 94–104.
Jacobs Starkey, L. (1994). An evaluation of emergency food
bags. Journal of the Canadian Dietetic Association, 55,
175–178.
Jacobs Starkey, L., Gray-Donald, K., & Kuhnlein, H. V.
(1999). Nutrient intake of food bank users is related to
frequency of food bank use, household size, smoking,
education and country of birth. Journal of Nutrition, 129,
883–889.
Jacobs Starkey, L., & Kuhnlein, H. V. (2000). Montreal food
bank users’ intakes compared with recommendations of
Canada’s Food Guide to Healthy Eating. Canadian Journal
of Dietetic Practice and Research, 61, 73–75.
Jacobs Starkey, L., Kuhnlein, H., & Gray-Donald, K. (1998).
Food bank users: Sociodemographic and nutritional char-
acteristics. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 158,
1143–1149.
Kennedy, A., Sheeshka, J., & Smedmor, L. (1992). Enhancing
food security: A demonstration support program for
emergency food centre providers. Journal of the Canadian
Dietetic Association, 53, 284–287.
Lang, T. (1997). Dividing up the cake: Food as social
exclusion. In A. Walker, & C. Walker (Eds.), Britain divided
(pp. 213–227). London: CPAG Ltd..
Lang, T. (1999). The complexities of globalization: The UK as a
case study of tensions within the food system and the
challenge to food policy. Agriculture and Human Values, 16,
169–185.
Le Bihan, G., Michaud, C., & Rotily, M. (1997). Food and
health of deprived populations in France: current situation.
.
In B. Kohler, .
E. Feichtinger, E. Barlosius, & E. Dowler
(Eds.), Poverty and Food in Welfare Societies (pp. 316–324).
Berlin: Edition Sigma.
Leather, S. (1996). The making of modern malnutrition. London
UK: The Caroline Walker Trust.
Lofland, J., & Lofland, L. (1995). Analyzing social settings.
Belmont: Wadsworth.
McIntyre, L., Connor, S. K., & Warren, J. (2000). Child hunger
in Canada: Results of the 1994 national longitudinal survey
of children and youth. Canadian Medical Association
Journal, 163, 961–965.
National Council of Welfare. (1999). Poverty Profile 1997.
Ottawa ON: Minister of Public Works and Government
Services Canada.
New Zealand Network Against Food Poverty. (1999). Hidden
hunger: Food and low income in New Zealand. Wellington
NZ: New Zealand Network Against Food Poverty.
Nord, M., Jemison, K., & Bickel, G. (1999). Prevalence of food
insecurity and hunger, by state, 1996–1998. Washington DC:
Economic Research Service US Department of Agriculture.
 V. Tarasuk, J.M. Eakin / Social Science & Medicine 56 (2003) 1505–1515
Patton, M. Q. (1999). Enhancing he quality and credibility
of qualitative analysis. Health Services Research, 34,
1189–1208.
Poppendieck, J. (1994). Dilemmas of emergency food: A guide
for the perplexed. Agriculture and Human Values, 11, 69–76.
Poppendieck, J. (1995). Hunger in America: Typification and
responses. In D. Maurer, & J. Sobal (Eds.), Eating Agendas:
Food and Nutrition as Social Problems (pp. 11–34). New
York: Aldine DeGruyter.
Poppendieck, J. (1997). The USA: Hunger in the land of plenty.
In G. Riches (Ed.), First world hunger (pp. 134–164).
London: MacMillan Press Ltd..
Poppendieck, J. (1998a). Sweet charity? Emergency food and the
end of entitlement. New York, NY: Penguin Putnam Inc..
Poppendieck, J. (1998b). Want amid plenty: From hunger to
inequality. Monthly Review, 50, 125–136.
Riches, G. (1986). Food banks and the welfare crisis. Ottawa,
ON: Canadian Council on Social Development.
Riches, G. (1989). Responding to hunger in a wealthy society:
Issues and options. Journal of the Canadian Dietetic
Association, 50, 150–154.
Riches, G. (1997a). Hunger, food security and welfare policies:
Issues and debates in first world societies. Proceedings of the
Nutrition Society, 56, 63–74.
Riches, G. (1997b). Hunger in Canada: Abandoning the right to
food. In G. Riches (Ed.), First world hunger, food security and
welfare politics (pp. 46–77). London: Macmillan Press Ltd..
Riches, G. (Ed.), (1997c). First world hunger. London:
Macmillan Press Ltd.
Russell, D. G., Parnell, W. R., Wilson, N. C., Faed, J.,
Ferguson, E., Herbison, P., Horwath, C., Nye, T., Reid, P.,
1515
Walker, R., & Wilson, B. (1999). NZ foodNZ people key
results of the 1997 national nutrition survey.. Wellington,
New Zealand: Ministry of Health.
Silverman, D. (1985). Qualitative methodology and sociology.
Aldershot, England: Gower.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1991). Basics of qualitative research.
Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
Tarasuk, V. S., & Beaton, G. H. (1999a). Household food
insecurity and hunger among families using food banks.
Canadian Journal of Public Health, 90, 109–113.
Tarasuk, V. S., & Beaton, G. H. (1999b). Women’s dietary
intakes in the context of household food insecurity. Journal
of Nutrition, 129, 672–679.
Tarasuk, V., & Davis, B. (1996). Responses to food insecurity
in the changing Canadian welfare state. Journal of Nutrition
Education, 28, 71–75.
Tarasuk, V. S., & Maclean, H. (1990). The institutionalization
of food banks in Canada: A public health concern.
Canadian Journal of Public Health, 81, 331–332.
Teron, A. C., & Tarasuk, V. S. (1999). Charitable food
assistance: What are food bank users receiving. Canadian
Journal of Public Health, 90, 382–384.
Uttley, S. (1997). Hunger in New Zealand: A question of rights?
In G. Riches (Ed.), First world hunger (pp. 78–107). London:
MacMillan Press Ltd..
Wilson, J. (1997). Australia: Lucky country/hungry silence. In
G. Riches (Ed.), First world hunger (pp. 14–45). London:
MacMillan Press Ltd..
Wilson, B., & Steinman, C. (2000). Hungercount 2000: A surplus
of hunger. Toronto ON: Canadian Association of Food
Banks.